Why do people use multiple DAWs?

[jamcat]

It's good to try a few different DAWs when you're starting out and then pick the one that you work best with. The goal should be using a DAW that you don't have to learn, because it just works the way you expect it to. It's also obviously a bonus if your DAW covers all of the bases, so you don't need different software for mastering, or scoring, or live performance. Of course when you think about it like that, it becomes obvious that Studio One Pro is the only DAW you should be using.

[machinesworking]

It's good to try a few different DAWs when you're starting out and then pick the one that you work best with. The goal should be using a DAW that you don't have to learn, because it just works the way you expect it to. It's also obviously a bonus if your DAW covers all of the bases, so you don't need different software for mastering, or scoring, or live performance. Of course when you think about it like that, it becomes obvious that Studio One Pro is the only DAW you should be using.

You would likely be surprised that your descriptions of Studio One made me realize I would not enjoy using it at all.

IMO that it can cover all the bases is far more important than my initial impressions that it works like I would expect. Plus to me the most important element is that once you really learn the software the workflow is faster, not hindered by it's pandering to those that can't read a manual, who need it to be simple.

[jamcat]

Except that Studio One Pro's workflow is already optimized to be fast and immediate, as well as intuitive. Most things can be done in one or two clicks, or with drag and drop, instead of 7 or 8 steps like other DAWs.

[BONES]

Plus to me the most important element is that once you really learn the software the workflow is faster, not hindered by it's pandering to those that can't read a manual, who need it to be simple.

It doesn't need to be simple to require no learning, it needs to be intuitive. But what's intuitive for you will depend what you're used to. e.g. Orion had single click note entry in the piano roll, whereas every other DAW seems to require a double click, which feels incredibly unintuitive to me. Even 7 years after I stopped using Orion it still catches me out, but to anyone coming from pretty much any other DAW, double-click is intuitive and anything else would be confusing. It even took me a long time to get used to drag'n'drop (which I still don't like using but I knew going in that was its "thing").

[machinesworking]

Plus to me the most important element is that once you really learn the software the workflow is faster, not hindered by it's pandering to those that can't read a manual, who need it to be simple.

It doesn't need to be simple to require no learning, it needs to be intuitive. But what's intuitive for you will depend what you're used to. e.g. Orion had single click note entry in the piano roll, whereas every other DAW seems to require a double click, which feels incredibly unintuitive to me. Even 7 years after I stopped using Orion it still catches me out, but to anyone coming from pretty much any other DAW, double-click is intuitive and anything else would be confusing. It even took me a long time to get used to drag'n'drop (which I still don't like using but I knew going in that was its "thing").

I don't even think intuitive is necessary, if the workflow is fast when you learn the method.
I can't stand the drag and drop method if it's the only way, it's what bothers me in Live when I use it, great search function, but unintuitive method for instantiating without drag and drop, I just end up using drag and drop and not liking it. IMO there should be an intuitive you can be braindead and fuss your way through it method, and a set of simple keystrokes that you can learn for speed for most major functions in a DAW. This way you learn the keystrokes for the things you use all the time, and don't have to pull up google to figure out some arcane command you need.

[BONES]

There will always be things like that, though. e.g. Once you set up your MIDI controller(s), you don't have to do it again until you buy a new computer (or a new controller), so it's never going to stick in your head. That's where Gregor's minute long videos come in handy. (It's actually easy but I can never remember how to get the process started.)

Intuitiveness may not be necessary in the longer term but it's a great way to get new users into your product. If you can be productive right away, it's going to make an impression. It is what convinced me to spend money on Studio One.

BTW, my wishes were answered last night - Heavyocity are having a sale and I picked up Machina for $50 off.

[jamcat]

I switched to Studio One from Cubase, and it instantly clicked for me. It was like a sleeker, less bloated Cubase without all the floating windows and stumbling blocks everywhere.

My all-time least favorite DAW of all-time (yes, it’s so bad it had to be said twice) is Pro Tools. How many hoops do you have to jump through just to load up an instrument or a live audio track with an ampsim? By the time you're finally playing, the inspiration is gone.

[Shane Sanders]

FL Studio is my go-to because of comfort, but I bought Ableton Live because I have an Ableton Push 3 and wanted to be able to bring those fiddly sessions into something mouse-driven at some point. I'm still a newb at Ableton and haven't finished a single track in it due to distractions. But, I have hundreds of finished tracks in FL Studio—just wanted a more hands-on experience option.

[FAS122]

Because I'd rather deal with large chunks of audio in Ableton than Renoise. Beyond that though the only reason I'd ever use anything else is out of interest.

[max1mus audio]

For testing.

[cryophonik]

Maybe someone else has mentioned this already, but one of the main reasons I currently use multiple DAWs is for separate parts of my workflow (especially since ARA is not native in Logic on Silicon Macs). Last year, I switched to Luna 2.0 as my main DAW for tracking and processing vocals when they added ARA support. I actually really like Luna's workflow, interface, and the way it integrates with my Appollo interfaces and UA Control. I also have an SSL UF1 control surface that is set up to simplify my workflow in both DAWs and I can switch between them with the push of a button. If/when Logic ever receives a fix for ARA, I may go back to using Logic for both tracking and song production/mixing, but this Logic/Luna workflow actually works very smoothly for me. That said, I do hope that UA improves comping in Luna - it's certainly usable, but feels far behind more mature DAWs.

[BONES]

So you basically use one thing for pre-processing and the other for mixing and stuff? That's kind of the way I work with Photoshop and After Effects - I prep assets in Photoshop before I load them into After Effects to do the actual work. It keeps my AE projects cleaner and leaner than trying to do absolutely everything in After Effects. They sort of work well together in two ways - After Effects can import complex, layered Photoshop files and retain 100% of their features and editability, plus I can go back to Photoshop and re-edit images and they auto update in After Effects. Without those two features it wouldn't be worth the hassle.

How much effort is it for you to go back to Luna to fix something you hadn't noticed or done properly once you start working Logic? Because that's a problem I had yesterday whilst mastering our album - I noticed a few things in a couple of the mixes I wanted to fix but because Ozone creates a copy of the pre-mastered file, I couldn't just re-render the song after I'd fixed it, I had to also copy/paste it over the copy Ozone was reading from (once I located it), which made it extremely clunky. A lot of that was exacerbated by the way neither Ozone nor Studio Pro take full advantage of the power of the Windows Open/Save dialogues, which makes saving things to specific locations a lot harder than it needs to be. It seems to be a very common thing with audio software, like it's easier not to do a good job of leveraging the OS because it makes it easier to port to other OSes or something. That's why I am a big fan of Windows-only software that doesn't get hobbled for the sake of cross-platform compatibility.

[cryophonik]

So you basically use one thing for pre-processing and the other for mixing and stuff?

Yeah, sorta. Basically, every song is started and finished in Logic, but I usually have a separate project for tracking and comping vocals. I start with the song idea in Logic, then bounce a stereo wav that I import into my vocal tracking template in Luna, set the tempo, and record and process the vocals. Once the vocals are done, I just bring them back into the original song idea in Logic and finish everything there. As I mentioned, I do this mostly for the convenience of using ARA plugins in Luna, but I also find that it’s a cleaner process to track and comp vocals in a separate project file, whether I’m using Luna or just a different Logic recording template. I have very little experience with After Effects, but I use PS a lot for photography and that sounds similar to my workflow.

How much effort is it for you to go back to Luna to fix something you hadn't noticed or done properly once you start working Logic? Because that's a problem I had yesterday whilst mastering our album - I noticed a few things in a couple of the mixes I wanted to fix but because Ozone creates a copy of the pre-mastered file, I couldn't just re-render the song after I'd fixed it, I had to also copy/paste it over the copy Ozone was reading from (once I located it), which made it extremely clunky. A lot of that was exacerbated by the way neither Ozone nor Studio Pro take full advantage of the power of the Windows Open/Save dialogues, which makes saving things to specific locations a lot harder than it needs to be. It seems to be a very common thing with audio software, like it's easier not to do a good job of leveraging the OS because it makes it easier to port to other OSes or something. That's why I am a big fan of Windows-only software that doesn't get hobbled for the sake of cross-platform compatibility.

The only times I need to go back to my vocal tracking project is if we decide to record more vocals, or if I need to further edit some vocal tracks, which is not very frequent. It’s really not any more effort than it would be if I recorded them in Logic, but my situation is a little different than what you’re describing and, yeah, I’ve encountered that same issue with Ozone.

[pekbro]

After Effects is photoshop over time basically. Totally meant to feel that way too.

These days I use multiple DAWs for compatibility mostly. Tho I would still do it if that were never an issue. I just like the different workflows and capabilities, they are all interesting to me.

Currently, cpu consumption is a compatibility issue for me and my core i5. I should probably just use Reaper as it’s the most efficient (seemingly).